..... why is so many republican states have the worst guns laws more so than democratic states,and why do so many gun owners hate clinton, when it was the republican congress that passed the 1994 so called assault weapons ban by not veto it.
p.s. wasn't jim brady a republician presidential lacky, glad that disease is kicking his ass [:D]

Well I'm too lazy to check the numbers, but maybe there are more Reublican-controlled states than Democratic-controlled?
As far as the 1994 Congress passing the AW ban, you're wrong - the elections held in 1994 resulted in Republicans controlling Congress. Clinton gave a lot of the credit for this to gun owners and the NRA.
Republican, Democrat, they're all politicians who consider themselves the ruling class and they're afraid of the citizens having guns. Sometimes I think the only reason one side is "for" them is that the other side is against them.

There are two kinds of Republicans basically, the Blue Blood Elitests who believe lowering taxes is the main priority. Many of them are pro-choice and socially liberal.
These type vote against guns.
There are also Democratic Elitists, who vote against guns. Al Gore used to be pro-gun, but when he became VP, he switched.
The important thing is to check your NRA voting guide and see which canidate gets the better grade on gun votes.

When They Knock Down Your Front Door, How You Going To Come? With Your Hands On Your Head Or On The Trigger Of Your Gun?Bassist Paul Simonon-The Clash

What really burns me up, is how short peoples memories are.. I usually vote Demo, because I am a union member and a blue collar worker,, I voted for Regan the first time he ran, and Bush Sr. the first time he ran too... I have never been out of work so much in my life as during the Regan years,,, he actually wanted a sub-minimum wage,, oh well I'm getting off the subject..Peoples short memories.. Bush sr. totally banned I think 42 "assault" rifles, by an Executive order,, your congress and senate, didn't even get a chance to vote on it..Most of these fine rifles, have never made it back to our shores,,Steyr AUG's. Valmets, Galils etc... gone forever,,go to a gunshow and all anybody talked about is how bad Clinton was,, nobody remembers the NRA NOT backing Bush sr. in his second run, Remember Regan banning all further manufacture of class III weapons,,even though there was never a documented case of a legally owened full auto ever being used in a crime???? I guess all Clinton banned was bayonet lugs, and high cap magazines,,,maybe SKS, So which party has the worst record... and the Republican controlled house and senate, voted on clinton's stuff,, Unlike Regans and Bush Sr.'s bans, which didn't even get a vote.. Like someone earlier said ,,vote the record of the indivual, because the above shows you can't trust party lines

Well, well, well, [b]kentstate4[/b], how can you be so wrong about so many things in one post?
Where'd you get your name?[:D]
From the Democratic Underground?[:D]
Do you check your facts?
No? Well, then you need to in the future, or you'll get slammed even worse.
Eric The(TryHarder)Hun[>]:)]

Both [i]parties[/i] are equally bad when it comes to guns.
Reagan didn't give us the MG ban, it was Frank Lautenburg who slipped that amendment into FOPA. Blame the NRA for still supporting FOPA after that little poison pill was added to it--they claim they were unaware of it, but that's simply untrue.
Bush the Elder gave us the original semi-auto (with evil features) import ban in 1989. This laid the groundwork for the AW ban in 1994 crime bill. Quite a few republicans voted for that piece of legislation (and every single one of them voted for the amendment that added AWs/hicaps to the crime bill--bet you didn't know THAT!) That old saw about the AW ban "passing by one vote" is pretty much a lie.
The 89 import ban was strengthened by Bill CLinton in 1998. This disallowed the importation of all semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting a high capacity magazine.
So or the last few decades, the republican party has just as poor a record on gun control as the democrats--though individual republicans tend to be better than their democratic counterparts. Make sense?
For more information, visit [url=http://www.gunowners.org]Gun Owners of America[/url] for their congressional member rankings, and [url=http://thomas.loc.gov]The Library of Congress[/url] for party affiliation of those representatives, and full voting records (going back to 1989.)
Plenty to be learned, when you look at the full history of legislation.

I usually vote Demo, because I am a union member and a blue collar worker

View Quote

40% of all union workers voted for Reagan in both of his elections. 40% of all union workers usually vote Republican in National eclections.
Amazing thing is, 90% of the Union's campaign contributions go to the DemocRats!

I have never been out of work so much in my life as during the Regan years,,, he actually wanted a sub-minimum wage,, oh well I'm getting off the subject..Peoples short memories..

View Quote

So keeping [b]MoparLou[/b] employed is somehow a Presidential duty?
Trust me, I didn't vote for [u]any[/u] President to keep myself employed!
What the Hell are you paying your precious Union its dues for? [:D]
Union didn't do as much for you as Reagan did.
You and everyone in your Union got screwed and are continuing to get screwed.
Have you tried signing on with the Democratic Underground site?
They speak your kind of language there.
Eric The(Real)Hun[>]:)]

kill, hun, kill!
in all honesty, it is true that you must look at an individuals record to tell where they really lie...
the problem is now one cannot rely on hardly any politician or, hell, branch of government, to do their sworn duty and uphold the constitution of our great country.
in truth, every supreme court justice that watched any of the above mentioned bills/laws/orders passed KNEW that they were unconstitutional! every legislator that helped usher in campaign finance reform KNEW that it was unconstitutional! does that stop them from passing them as law? NO!
very few people in our government, whether it be local, state, or federal, are actually deserving of the public trust. very few of them are true sworn defenders of our nation.
keep your eyes peeled for these bastards, and shout them out and expose them at every turn!
oh, and kenstate- check your spelllllleng and grammartification..

"How long has it been since we've flown through shadows?I have walked on many other planets..."

Originally Posted By Zak:
(and every single one of them voted for the amendment that added AWs/hicaps to the crime bill--bet you didn't know THAT!) That old saw about the AW ban "passing by one vote" is pretty much a lie.
I worked nights when this thing passed and it did pass by one vote. At around 1am only Dole and a Demo. who's name I can not remember stood on the senate floor and when ask if there was any dissenting vote Dole stood there like a bump on a log.

Originally Posted By Norm_G:
"Republican" and "democrat" are too broad a brush to paint with. Look to the individual's record.

View Quote

I agree with Norm. We should always vote for the candidate not the party; because there are always anti-gun Republican(Richard Riordan, former mayor of L.A. Calif), and of course pro-gun democrats(Joe Baca of San Bernardino, Calif)
But the main reason why we get these B.S. gun control laws is that many of the politicians don't fear the voters because poeple don't vote. Only haif of the elibigible people actually register to vote, out of them register voters, only half of them actually vote. So on a good turnout what you get is only 25% of the people tell the other 75% what to do. A representive democracy requires that everyone particpates. I was surprised many gunners don't vote and don't want to be invovlved in politics, but yet they complain to me about oppressive gun laws.
I have seen where voters go down the list and vote for Democratic or Republican candidates without knowing what the candidates stand for. These lazy voters who vote blindly are part of the problem, they don't vote intelligently knowing all of the isssues.

Originally Posted By dpcop:
Vote Libertarian!!!! (or at least take a look and consider the possibility)
Ya know, I was kinda interested in the Libertarian party. Then I talked to one. He asked me what I did and when I responded Correctional Officer I might as well been satan himself. I'm no fan of big government, but I do see the need for some government services.

There are likely as many gun owners that are democrats as republicans. Problem is, they may not vote that way because gun issues may not be at the top of their list when they vote. Unfortunately, certain unions and others groups try and pressure their members to vote for the liberal democrat, even in the primaries. It's all in how active the voters are in a certain area of the country or even a certain part of a state. It also depends on the "local culture".
So as far as elections go, it's all in primaries. If "conservative democrats" win in the primaries, then gun owners win, but this rarely happens. The media keeps saying that the majority of people's views run toward the middle. If this were true, we wouldn't have any liberals in congress. Of course most people don't vote in this country, so who knows.
When the republicans took control of congress in late 1994, they overturned the assault weapon ban in 1995 in the House, but then Senator Majority Leader Bob Dole refused to call for a vote to overturn in the Senate.[:(] Apparently he didn't believe that in bringing it to the floor anything would be accomplished (True,it wouldn't have been a vote in our favor). I don't think I've ever forgiven him for this though.
Vote the man, not the party.
You'll never find a polititian that you agree with on every issue. Such an animal doesn't exist as far as I'm concerned.

Republicans are two kinds of people.
1. Establishment stodgers that were raised by parents that could afford private school, good colleges, good doctors, and they live in nice neighborhoods. I used to live in Harbor Springs Mi with all the Republicans that retired to the seashore. You can see their values very quickly. $7 million dollar house on a gravel road. They vote down every tax increase for any reason, because it interferes with their source.
2. True believers like "The Hon". They believe the message based on some kernal of truth they hold dear. If you think GWB sits around the White House in his tighty whities drinking Lone Star and throwing the empty cans at the TV every time some poor bastards rights are violated on "Cops" then being a straight ticket Republican may be for you!

Mr. eric the phun, u should check this
www.republicianliberty.org/libdex/LI1994_over.htm
and i do my homework sir and it was law no.103-322 on sept 13 ,1994 but the house passed h.r 125 march 1995 but the republicians in the senate never voted just let it pass www.opensecrets.org/pubs/cashingin_104th/cgi-shl/cashingin.cgi?issue=guns&vote=y OR this 1 SIR www.opensecrets.org/pubs/cashingin_104th/cgi-shl/cashingin.cgi?issue=guns&vote=n
remember i mind is a terrible thing to waste just ask w bush jr. or dan the walking d.i.c.k. quayle or how about reagan reagan a true middle class hater [:D] so come blast away
p.s. the name is for the murdered 4 american college student u turd for the dead

I wrote Bush today and told him that "I don't vote Republican because I love Republicans...I do so because I don't like my Rights being taken away." And since they aren't defending
my Rights I must return to voting my conscience...
and to those who think this is throwing my vote away..NO it is not because if I vote for someone who is taking our Rights then I am basically giving my approval to tyranny.

Originally Posted By kentstate4:
Mr. eric the phun, u should check this
www.republicianliberty.org/libdex/LI1994_over.htm
and i do my homework sir and it was law no.103-322 on sept 13 ,1994 but the house passed h.r 125 march 1995 but the republicians in the senate never voted just let it pass www.opensecrets.org/pubs/cashingin_104th/cgi-shl/cashingin.cgi?issue=guns&vote=y OR this 1 SIR www.opensecrets.org/pubs/cashingin_104th/cgi-shl/cashingin.cgi?issue=guns&vote=n
remember i mind is a terrible thing to waste just ask w bush jr. or dan the walking d.i.c.k. quayle or how about reagan reagan a true middle class hater [:D] so come blast away
p.s. the name is for the murdered 4 american college student u turd for the dead

View Quote

So who are your "political heros"?
And what are you doing on this site?

kent, while the shootings were unfortunate, it was just 4 less liberals in my book.
As for the Hun, I feel sorry for you calling him out. He will crush you with his knowledge base.
As for RR, he is the ONLY reason we were true superpower. Do yo uhonestly think that Ronnie was anti middle class?? Hmm... The facts don't back it up. He did run up the deficit, but he had no choice, since prior administrations had emasculated the military, similar to what has happened in the last decade.
If we didn't have lazyfare, I believe that the deficit would have been a lot lower.
The democrats, as a party, are socialist. They feel that the average Joe cannot think for himself, so they try to take away choices (which is the problem with government health care).
Now the Republicans have the same issues with other things like the "war on drugs".
But Kalifornia, New Jersy, New York, Ill, are states with large liberal demo cities, which override everyone else, so your first statement cannot apply to all states. And of the ones I named, most of them ARE democrat states.

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
kent, while the shootings were unfortunate, it was just 4 less liberals in my book.

View Quote

I honestly can't form the thoughts, much less words, to answer this. I hope it's simply a troll.
If it isn't, there isn't any response I can make that doesn't include alot of four letter words.
Four people, killed by their government essentially for holding political views that conflicted with those of the establishment, and all you can say is it's "unfortunate" and that it's only four dead liberals?
Turn your militia rifle in, sir. With an attitude like this, you've no reason to own it.
(edited bcause I can't spell.)

when it was the republican congress that passed the 1994 so called assault weapons ban by not veto it.

View Quote

and i do my homework sir

View Quote

No, you don't. Otherwise you wouldn't say that the 'assault weapons ban' was passed by the Republican Congress, when the Republicans did not assume control of the House or Senate until January, 1995.
As for the rest of your stuff, I'm afraid I didn't look at, for the first post you made didn't warrant any further investigation by me.
Eric The(Sorry,MaybeNextTime)Hun[>]:)]

Originally Posted By MoparLou:
What really burns me up, is how short peoples memories are.. I usually vote Demo, because I am a union member and a blue collar worker,, I voted for Regan the first time he ran, and Bush Sr. the first time he ran too... I have never been out of work so much in my life as during the Regan years,,, he actually wanted a sub-minimum wage,, oh well I'm getting off the subject..Peoples short memories.. Bush sr. totally banned I think 42 "assault" rifles, by an Executive order,, your congress and senate, didn't even get a chance to vote on it..Most of these fine rifles, have never made it back to our shores,,Steyr AUG's. Valmets, Galils etc... gone forever,,go to a gunshow and all anybody talked about is how bad Clinton was,, nobody remembers the NRA NOT backing Bush sr. in his second run, Remember Regan banning all further manufacture of class III weapons,,even though there was never a documented case of a legally owened full auto ever being used in a crime???? I guess all Clinton banned was bayonet lugs, and high cap magazines,,,maybe SKS, So which party has the worst record... and the Republican controlled house and senate, voted on clinton's stuff,, Unlike Regans and Bush Sr.'s bans, which didn't even get a vote.. Like someone earlier said ,,vote the record of the indivual, because the above shows you can't trust party lines

View Quote

First, why do you vote to give away your money to scum that think they are entitled to something for nothing. That's what you do when you vote Democrat.
Second, the AW ban was voted in BEFORE the Republicans gained control of the Congress, so get your facts straight.
As for Class 3, read zak's post.
Some of you need to get your facts straight. Would have rather had Al Bore? I think some of you are really DU members over here trying to stir things up. At least you spout so called 'facts' like they and the antis do.
I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I like some ideas from both sides. However, the Dems lost me when they nominated Clinton as their choice for presidential candidate. I am a vet and I have no use for the likes of him or Hanoi Jane. The Dems choosing Clinton was just another slap in the face to those of us who served back then, much like the American public slapped us in the face back then just for being in uniform. I am pro choice, but right now, 2nd Amendment rights are far more important to me. I like the libertarian ideals, but don't like the Libertarian party and some of the things they have said since 9/11. Given the choice we had last time, I voted Republican as the lesser of two main evils.

If it's a Colt, it's a copy of an original ArmaLite.

I am not LARRYG36.

Racing is life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting.

If your AR10 is marked Geneseo, IL, it's still an AR10 no matter what some people say.

Originally Posted By kentstate4:
..... why is so many republican states have the worst guns laws more so than democratic states,and why do so many gun owners hate clinton, when it was the republican congress that passed the 1994 so called assault weapons ban by not veto it.
p.s. wasn't jim brady a republician presidential lacky, glad that disease is kicking his ass [:D]

View Quote

You really don't have your act together. It is Sarah Brady that has cancer, not Jim.
Congress was not Republican controlled when the AW bill was passed.
How about a list of all the states with strict gun control along with which party is in power in that state. You know, facts to back up your claim. You know, the antis state a lot of 'facts' with no basis in truth to them.

If it's a Colt, it's a copy of an original ArmaLite.

I am not LARRYG36.

Racing is life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting.

If your AR10 is marked Geneseo, IL, it's still an AR10 no matter what some people say.

Actually the 94 law was passed by the Dems with the help of "13 brave Republicans" as I recall Clinton's quote at that time. One of them was my "brave" congressman, Jim Ramstad, whom I've been not-voting-for ever since. I don't vote for his Democratic foe but I just skip his race entirely. Hopefully the local Republicans will have the sense to drum him out of the party for that & his other liberal leanings. Then hopefully we can vote him out of office in favor of a real Republican.

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
kent, while the shootings were unfortunate, it was just 4 less liberals in my book.

View Quote

I honestly can't form the thoughts, much less words, to answer this. I hope it's simply a troll.
If it isn't, there isn't any response I can make that doesn't include alot of four letter words.
Four people, killed by their government essentially for holding political views that conflicted with those of the establishment, and all you can say is it's "unfortunate" and that it's only four dead liberals?
Turn your militia rifle in, sir. With an attitude like this, you've no reason to own it.
(edited bcause I can't spell.)

View Quote

Well, let's take a look at what a militia wepon ACTUALLY is. According to SCOUTS, in 1934, a militia weapon would have a military use.
It seems to me that my AR is of no military use, since it is a semiautomatic rifle, and the military uses the 3 round burst fire control version.
What I have is an emasculated version of a weapon.
And for anther, I have served my country for the last 11 years, and my father did 28 years in the military. He was overseas serving in the war when I was born.
So I have little sympathy for some rich kid draft dodgers who died. Callous?? Yes.
But oh well. I don't care what your opinion of me is.
The fewer liberals in this world, the better off we are.

Ok larryG and Hun,, I'm pushing 50 and suffer from CRS (can't remember sh!-) so maybe the dems were in the majority when it was voted on.. At least it was voted on, Unlike Bush Sr's dictatorship style sign my name and make it law assault rifle ban,,, that is what got a lot of it going. and why there was a push to get him kicked out of the NRA,, which according to their by laws couldn't be done because of that,,kind of like his read my lips no new taxes thing he totally reversed on,, he said we didn't need new gun laws just enforce the ones we had, then came up with this crap,, fortunately I had my
FFL then and had already purchased one of the first AR15A2 govt carbines off the assembly lines, even though they weren't affected by his ban,, Colt deemed them politically incorrect and voluntarily stopped civilian sales a little later... The next purchase I was going to make for myself was an AUG, but it was too late before I got the money saved up.. Hopefully his son learned a lesson from this and will leave guns alone,,, And Regan could have Vetoed the machine gun ban, right,,, The point I'm trying to make is you can't trust Party lines with our 2nd amendment rights.. Yes Republicans are generally more favorable,, but these two cases are worse than everything else since GCA68 put together...And Clinton changed the usual Democrat sterotype about welfare,,, the welfare roles shrunk to an all time low during his administration, so a vote for a democrat is not necassarily a vote to give somebody something for nothing anymore, I identify with the extreme right more than the left,,, most super liberals turn my stomach, Just from an economic, and tax standpoint i vote Demo sometimes.. I am open minded and can go both ways (politics only) Have 3 children 1 in college, and was recently Laid off from my welding job with CSX railroad.. Funny,, when the election was finally awarded.. I told the guys at work,, "We'll be laid off in 6 months" well I was wrong,, it took 9 months to get all 42 of us...Oh well, enough ranting for now.

Originally Posted By MoparLou:
I am open minded and can go both ways (politics only) Have 3 children 1 in college, and was recently Laid off from my welding job with CSX railroad.. Funny,, when the election was finally awarded.. I told the guys at work,, "We'll be laid off in 6 months" well I was wrong,, it took 9 months to get all 42 of us...Oh well, enough ranting for now.

View Quote

The funniest part of this whole post. You [b]actually believe[/b] that? If that is the case I got a bridge I want to sell you. The economy was failing long before Bush took office. The economy does not care who is sitting in the oval office.

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
Well, let's take a look at what a militia wepon ACTUALLY is. According to SCOUTS, in 1934, a militia weapon would have a military use.
It seems to me that my AR is of no military use, since it is a semiautomatic rifle, and the military uses the 3 round burst fire control

View Quote

wow, i wish you would argue for us for the fifty caliber, being that those are almost all semiauto or bolt action!

"How long has it been since we've flown through shadows?I have walked on many other planets..."

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
kent, while the shootings were unfortunate, it was just 4 less liberals in my book.

View Quote

I honestly can't form the thoughts, much less words, to answer this. I hope it's simply a troll.
If it isn't, there isn't any response I can make that doesn't include alot of four letter words.
Four people, killed by their government essentially for holding political views that conflicted with those of the establishment, and all you can say is it's "unfortunate" and that it's only four dead liberals?
Turn your militia rifle in, sir. With an attitude like this, you've no reason to own it.
(edited bcause I can't spell.)

View Quote

Look, Kent was something that never should have happened. Even so, [b]no one[/b] in the government gave the order to fire into the crowd. The National Guard was there because these clowns were getting increasingly violent and out of control. What the hell was the Governor suppose to do, let them burn and pillage until they lost interest?
Those four died because they and others made a extremely bad decision to advance in a threatening manner on people armed with rifles. Most of us cannot even begin to imagine being advanced upon by a hostile crowd that seems willing to do us real harm. If I thought they meant to harm or kill me and I could not convince them to do otherwise before they were upon me, I would likely fire upon them too. At that point, it is you or them.
There were a lot of bad decisions made that day, no one side has a monopoly on them. It could have just as easily been four dead National Guardsmen.

Originally Posted By kentstate4:
remember i mind is a terrible thing to waste just ask w bush jr. or dan the walking d.i.c.k. quayle or how about reagan reagan a true middle class hater [:D] so come blast away

View Quote

I wouldn't get too high on yourself here. Based on the number of grammatical mistakes you have in your two posts, I wouldn't say that you are the brightest bulb either!

Originally Posted By Hank:
wow, i wish you would argue for us for the fifty caliber, being that those are almost all semiauto or bolt action!

View Quote

Hank,
To let you in on a little secret, even a sawed off shotgun had use in the military. Ever hear of a trench gun??
But in the scope of what the SCOTUS said, it was of a militia value.
The military uses the semiautomatic .50 cal, hence it has a militia value.
The aftermarket AR's are not used by ANY military, hence have no militia value.
Of course, when the NFA '34 was enacted, almost all machineguns were crew served, the BAR being the notable exception.
So I believe that when the NFA was enacted, the SCOTUS did not envision that the standard issue weapon would be a "machinegun".
But since it IS (in the form of a select fire weapon) the NFA technically wouldn't apply, according to the SCOTUS ruling.
A militia weapon IMO, is one that HAS BEEN USED OR IS IN USE by the military. Therefore .50 cal rifles would be covered.

Originally Posted By tep0583:
Look, Kent was something that never should have happened. Even so, [b]no one[/b] in the government gave the order to fire into the crowd.

View Quote

Are you [i]entirely[/i] certain of this? While I agree that it's impossible to prove a negative (very difficult for the Ohio National Guard or anyone else to prove that it [i]didn't[/i] issue an order to open fire, and this was just a horrible accident) I don't think one can say for certain just what happened. It [i]is[/i] certain that the government in power (both state and federal) used a variety of methods to impeach the positions of, harass, and violate the civil rights of the leaders of these student uprisings.

The National Guard was there because these clowns were getting increasingly violent and out of control. What the hell was the Governor suppose to do, let them burn and pillage until they lost interest?

View Quote

No, I daresay that would not have been acceptable under anyone's definition. However, I also find the idea of putting what were almost certainly young, inexperienced guardsmen armed with fully automatic rifles in a position where they might have to USE those rifles on their fellow citizens to be even worse.
Some would call the events leading up to the boston massacre in 1775 riotous, yet most colonials of the time (and most americans of today) found that to be an inexcusable abuse of power by the british crown, even though it was the individual soldiers who opened fire. Why is Kent State any different?

There were a lot of bad decisions made that day, no one side has a monopoly on them. It could have just as easily been four dead National Guardsmen.

View Quote

I agree with that statement completely. The shock in my statement was not related to the dismissal of the Kent State incident (it's a contentious issue, where all of the facts are not, cannot, be known--people have different interpretations and theories, and even those who were there do not agree on what happened) but instead was directed at the utterly disgusting statement "Oh well, just another four dead liberals."
Hydguy, that isn't callousness--the world is a callous place, and I have no objection to those who recognize that fact. Instead, it's pure disgust at the idea that someone could view the death of four innocents at the hands of agents of their own government as a good thing.
And then the only response you can make is to dispute my definition of a militia rifle?
Let me clue you in on something: the liberals are almost certainly not our friends. For the most part, they stand against those ideals that most of us on this board seem to subscribe to. But in the end, they're still our COUNTRYMEN, and are entitled to those same rights that we would claim for ourselves. Being shot down like dogs by agents of their own government is certainly something that can NEVER be construed as good if one believes in what this country stands for!
What the fuck ever happened to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Or do you read that as "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, unless Hydguy doesn't happen to like what your idea of liberty and happiness is?"

Well Zak, I'm not tryung to hunt you down am I???
So I guess that amswers your question.
As for the Kent State riots, What do YOU want to do about it?
I for one, could care less if the liberals in this country all keeled over dead tomorrow.
They are NOT our countrymen. Our countrymen BELIEVE in the Constitution, something that the liberals have proven time and time again that they don't.
So as far as I'm concerned, liberals are just domestic terrorists. The biggest difference is they use emotions and the media to wage their war.

Originally Posted By grimshaw:
I used to live in Harbor Springs Mi
We've got a summer/ski home in Harbor (aka "God's Country"). I highly recommend Gurney's for the best sandwiches around. You know, the liquor store?

And Clinton changed the usual Democrat sterotype about welfare,,, the welfare roles shrunk to an all time low during his administration, so a vote for a democrat is not necassarily a vote to give somebody something for nothing anymore...

View Quote

Yes, Clinton finally signed the Welfare Reform Bill the [b]Third[/b] time it was placed on his desk.
He vetoed it the other two times.
Finally, Dick Morris, who was running his re-election bid, told him that the focus groups said 'sign it', so he did.
Sorry to hear about your layoff, but I don't think any of us want to live in a country where the President wants to micro-manage the economy to such a degree as would be necessary for [b]him[/b] to be the cause of unemployment!
Your labor union is the one who needs a whipping!
Eric The(Pro-LaboringMan)Hun[>]:)]

Ok Hun , let me give you some examples of how I was laid off during the Regan years as a direct result of his policies. I worked at a place that made among other things Pollution control devices that went in coal burning smokestacks. I'll be the first to agree that some of EPA's rules are ridiculous and cost a lot of business a lot of money..I am old enough to remember how if you drove by a coal fired power plant, you could see black plumes billowing out...your car in the parking lot was covered in ash, people living nearby were breathing this crap etc... get the picture.. Nixon, put in place a lot of air pollution, and water pollution standards, that were not excessive, and really helped..Reagan goes in, and to save the big companies some money, relaxes them,, Bingo, 35% of our business is in this related field and I am laid off.. He takes the ceiling off the price of gasoline that Carter had put on,,refineries are only making 200% or more profit, and when you are a little guy and travel a lot ,, gasoline can be a big percent of your budget...so gas prices shoot way up(good I guess if you live in an oil producing state) then during a lay-off because of Regans cut of amtrak service,,,which I welded Dust louvre filters for, and am laid off again,, I cross train to NDT inspection,,X-ray, ultrasonic, etc...Before the Regan recession 95% of schools graduates go to work in the oil fields, and off-shore in Gulf, but during it, we are capping domestic wells, so I can't find a job doing that...Remember Regans plan for a sub-minimum training wage,,, you know, the minimum wage that he vetoed increases for the whole 8 years he was in office..he wanted this training wage to be about 1-2 dollars an hour less.. so companies could use peoples desperation to find work, to work them at this training wage for 90 days, then guess what,, instead of making them full time for a whopping minimum wage..lay them off and hire somebody else with no benefits , insurance etc...for 90 days and do it all over again,, thank goodness this didn't come about.. and Unions ,, yes they have their bad points,, keeping deadbeats just because they have more seniority, while hard workers like me get laid off... I don't agree with them wholehartedly,, but you pay approx the same price for an equivelant car that is non-union made as you do for one that is, and the union workers make higher wages to spend and keep the economy moving at a better pace..When you give the bulk of tax breaks to the wealthy,, they only spend so much,,give it to the middle and lower class,, they spend overall a lot more, thus creating demand for more goods and services....

It troubles me when [b]any[/b] American gets shot and killed by another American who is in uniform. It should trouble all of you, too. Just because it was an "alleged" law-breaker or "avowed" liberal makes no difference.
It could just as easily be you or me. Or worse, your 20 year old son coming back from the mall with his girlfriend.
When sworn agents of the American gov't. aim weapons at other Americans [i]and pull the trigger[/i] we all better pay attention.
Because every time it happens it sets a precedent.

Grandfathering weapons only puts off until tomorrow what tyranny cannot accomplish today.

The only people made safer by gun control are criminals and tyrants.

I don't know who paid for this membership, but please accept my sincere gratitude.

• If republicans are pro -gun
.....Then Democrats aren't. It's a simple statement; don't read too much into it.
The Republicans can't solve your lay-off problems, your marriage problems, your assault-weapons-ban-problems, nor your "why aren't things the way I want them?" problems. But they are way ahead of whatever is in second place. Stop looking for a political party to solve all your problems for you.
Relax and enjoy life. It'll be over before you know it.

Actually Zak, I hope that the trigger guy gets life in prison, and the on scene commander gets at least 20 years.
I have no love for the alphabet soup agencies, and feel that having a trigger happy jackass on the job is bad.
Hell, the CAR DIDN"T EVEN FIT THE DISCRIPTION OF THE SUSPECT"S VEHICLE!!!
We need to get rid of the FBI,ATF, IRS, and what ever agency runs the lazyfare program.

Fly-N-Hitchhiker, your right,, enjoy life its too short, Hun, don't even reply to my last post. I'm going to have a couple of beers, forget the political stuff, check post about the new .17 rimfire.. that has me more excitied than any recent new gun.. I can shoot crows from inside the bedroom out the deck sliding glass door, without rattling the walls, like I'm doing now with my 22-250. they never look INSIDE the house, and never know what hit them 90-150 yards away... Fly-N I used to live in St. Pete. back in early 70's

Originally Posted By kentstate4:
remember i mind is a terrible thing to waste just ask w bush jr. or dan the walking d.i.c.k. quayle or how about reagan reagan a true middle class hater [:D] so come blast away

View Quote

I wouldn't get too high on yourself here. Based on the number of grammatical mistakes you have in your two posts, I wouldn't say that you are the brightest bulb either!

View Quote

[size=5]BRAVO![/size=5]

"How long has it been since we've flown through shadows?I have walked on many other planets..."

The whole point of my post was that all of these clinton haters on this site that have nothing good to say about him,need to check out the roll call for the 1994 ban.
Like eric the dumb, just believes the media and his almighty republicians buddies on here . The fact is that there we're republicians and democrats that both voted for the ban, not just the democrats. My early post has the link, but it didn't work "a real eye opener" in to the 1994 so-called democrat bill.
But back to my post was to show the whole picture not just a one sided freak show like both parties do ,as for my hero is my dad ,if i had to choose a political hero would be jesse ventura for winning a major office position as a minority party,also just imagine another party damn would be nice but demos and repubs will do anything to stop it.
As for the moderator MR.eric{holythanthou}phun, What it must feel like to have a closed mind, pretty shallow , good day sir[:D]

Why is it that if a person says some thing truthful, but bad about either shi#ty party your automatically branded as a oppose of that party u speak out against as the moderator has done if on just about every post he has had.